Lawyers Argue Trump Questioned Election In ‘Good Faith’

The legal team representing Donald Trump has moved to dismiss the charges against their client in federal court, claiming their client had a “good faith” reason to challenge the 2020 election results. According to the motion, Trump was under no need to take the findings of federal investigators who did not find evidence of massive electoral fraud at face value. It suggests that other forces may have impacted the campaign and claims that the US government provided “false guarantees” about the safety of the election that went beyond what was known to be true.

It is now abundantly evident from the brief that Trump’s legal team is attempting to cast doubt on the validity of the race or argue that their client’s concern was reasonable and not driven by criminality.

Trump’s legal representation requested authorization to compel special counsel Jack Smith’s team to provide extensive documents that could bolster their client’s defense. These documents would cover topics such as the effects of foreign interference, attempted and actual breaches of election infrastructure, and proof of possible “political bias” that may have influenced the intelligence community’s evaluation of the election.

Purportedly, no proof of fraud could have altered the vote, according to nationwide courts and even Trump’s attorney general. Oddly, the Homeland Security Department’s cybersecurity branch proclaimed it “the most secure in American history.” (This implies there have been various degrees of secure elections.)

Trump’s legal team refutes the claims that the Republican candidate disregarded all of the findings and instead plotted an unlawful effort to halt the peaceful transition of power and rescind the election.

Despite the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia had a “clear preference” for Trump over Clinton, the motion fails to mention Russia’s attempts to undermine trust in the 2016 election.

Additionally, it goes back to 2020 and the intelligence community’s attempt to identify possible meddling from nations like Iran, Russia, and China. According to the motion, the office cannot hold President Trump responsible for public discontent and lack of faith in the 2020 election results since it has refused to provide proof that foreign actors kindled the same fires that are implicated in the indictment.